At Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:35:41 +0000,
Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 03:42:17PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > Mark Brown wrote:
>> > > consistency I'd rather leave this just now and then separately go
> > > through and address this for all drivers at once - does that seem
> > > sensible to you?
>> > Well, the problem is that the dependency with I2C is incomplete right
> > now. We may build ASOC=y and I2C=m, and you'll get unresolved symbols
> > due to call of I2C function from asoc.
>> Yes, I agree that this would be an improvement. I'd just like to do it
> for all the drivers at once rather than have some of the drivers set up
> one way and some another.
Fair enough.
> > I'm not sure what is the proper way to fix this. If the codec driver
> > supports non-I2C and can be built without it, the explicit dependency
> > on I2C is of course wrong.
>> Yes, and of course users will still need to ensure that the appropriate
> bus driver for their platform is availiable on their system, though that
> could be loaded later. Still, we could make life a little easier for
> some users so it seems a worthwhile thing to do even though it doesn't
> solve everything.
Agreed.
Takashi